According to school researchers who reviewed nearly 200 studies on how artificial intelligence affects children and young people’s ability to learn and think, the evidence on AI’s impact on younger school children remains sparse. The researchers analysed 173 international studies that examined the use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in school and education, with the goal of determining whether AI tools strengthen or weaken children and youths’ capacity for critical thinking and independent problem‑solving. Their findings indicate that AI, on its own, neither strengthens nor weakens these abilities. Instead, the same technology can produce opposite effects depending on how it is employed. When AI is used to challenge assumptions, ask questions, compare viewpoints, and help students build their own reasoning, it supports important thinking skills. Conversely, when AI becomes a shortcut to a ready‑made answer, the likelihood of overdependence, more superficial thinking, and weakened independent problem solving increases. The Norwegian Media Authority’s survey of media habits among 9‑ to 18‑year‑olds shows that Google searches fell from 72 % in 2024 to 47 % in 2026 for this age group. The same survey reports that 39 % of Norwegian 11‑ to 12‑year‑olds now use AI. Additionally, visits to ung.no – Norway’s online information and communication channel for young people aged 13 to 20 – dropped from 24 million in 2024 to 18 million in 2025, a decline that researchers attribute partly to the shift toward AI tools and to Google’s new AI summaries. The literature review also uncovered three major gaps in current knowledge. First, about 80 % of the studies analysed involved university or college students, leaving limited understanding of how AI affects children and youths who are still developing their perceptual and evaluative skills. Second, most of the articles rely on self‑reporting, which is considered a less reliable method than objective longitudinal studies. Third, there is a pronounced geographic bias: South Asia, Southeast Asia, and East Asia (primarily China) contributed 28 studies; Spain and the United Kingdom each contributed nine; the United States contributed 15; Africa, South America, and Central Asia are seriously underrepresented. Despite these gaps, the existing data lean toward positive outcomes. Of 139 studies examining AI’s effect on critical thinking, 67 reported only positive effects, 33 reported only negative effects, and 39 reported both positive and negative effects. For problem‑solving ability, 57 of 103 studies found exclusively positive effects, 23 found exclusively negative effects, and 23 found mixed effects. The researchers stress that successful integration of AI in schools depends on teacher education. Educators must learn to use AI critically themselves and be able to teach children and young people to treat AI as a tool that supports, rather than replaces, their own thinking. Without such guidance, uncritical use of AI could widen disparities between students who employ the technology thoughtfully and those who rely on it merely to complete tasks faster, potentially creating challenges for schools and universities alike.
Key facts
- Google searches among 9‑18‑year‑olds in Norway fell from 72 % in 2024 to 47 % in 2026
- 39 % of Norwegian 11‑12‑year‑olds use AI
- Visits to ung.no dropped from 24 million (2024) to 18 million (2025)
- 173 international studies on GenAI in education were reviewed
- 80 % of the studied participants were university or college students